suriajay12
04-10 08:20 PM
http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2009/04/10/where-should-white-house-start-with-immigration-reform/
wallpaper Free vector seamless
JA1HIND
02-07 01:45 PM
I have mailed 17 more individual signed letters to WH address this afternoon and copy of these 17 signed letters in one envelope to IV address. Good to see new date. I will continue to get as many as I can before this new date.
Collected 11 signatures during NJ trip and I guess these will go into NJ account..and 6 signatures from FL [11(NJ)+07(FL)=17]
Arvind
Collected 11 signatures during NJ trip and I guess these will go into NJ account..and 6 signatures from FL [11(NJ)+07(FL)=17]
Arvind
justice4all
07-21 09:04 PM
Hi All,
Thank you for the overwhelming response. I did skim through the responses and agree with most of the suggestions/comments if not all.
Someone had brought the issue of FIFO and if there is anything in the law that states that FIFO has to be followed. I am not a law expert myself and cannot comment on if there is any such law. But what I am basing is more on the everyday commensense behaviour that all we humans follow for any queue. FIFO is the predominant thing being done for any queue and that will be the most resonable way to process be it a bunch of applicantions waiting on a queue or to service a number of people waiting on a queue in a bank or post office or whereever it might be. That is the fair, unbiased and non-preferential way of doing things. Isn't it?
I want to make sure to convey the point that I first of all wanted to bring this issue to everyone's attention. May be my message was worded strongly, but doesn't mean that I am not flexible.
I thought suing DOL is one of the options. Of course if there are other viable alternatives that will be less demanding, less expensive and will take a more non-confronting approach but still could have an equal impact in terms of resolving the issue amicably then I am all for it. But then the obvious question is what are the other equally good options? Someone mentioned about a petition. So what is a petition and how do we do it? Also mentioned was writing letters to congressmen etc. So who do we contact and how? Please, please anyone having the information please share.
One more thing is that I am all for a dialog with IV core members and their guidance for this. Since I started this thread doesn't mean that I wanted to sideline IVs, but this is the only way I thought I could communicate to the IV platform about the agony of this issue and how people have been affected by this. So I am all for talking with IV core members on this. But please let me know how I could do that?
So please let us start acting now: The list of next possible steps (in no particular order) are:
- Decide if there are viable alternatives to a lawsuit that is more non-confronting and first try them if possible
- Get the support of IV core team for this
- If no other alternatives are available then consider filing a case. Consult an attorney for this
- Raise more awareness about this and get allt he support we can
- Raise some money towards this cause
So please please provide more inputs so that we could start making some real progress. Thanks!!
Hello Risker,
After going through all postings, it is wise to consider the following actions in order:
1. Contact the IV core team and tell our problem. Ask their input about what we can do and whom we need to contact. They may let us in correct direction.
2. In the meantime, Get the details of peoples whose case are still in backlog centre.
3. Finally, nothing works and no one help us, file a lawsuit. (As I dont know anything about the lawsuit here, many of them mentioned that the lawsuit should be done by the employer and there is more possibility of loosing.. We should not lose heart on that. In the suit, we need to ask them to make it current and keep the same filing fees until 30 Sep 07)
P.S. As one of the posting mentioned, we may also consider waiting till Sep 07 before filing lawsuit. Because DOL promised to clear all cases before 30 Sep 07. If they dont then our case become more stronger. Till then we need to contact concerned people (like IV, congressman etc) and collect all infromation.
Thank you for the overwhelming response. I did skim through the responses and agree with most of the suggestions/comments if not all.
Someone had brought the issue of FIFO and if there is anything in the law that states that FIFO has to be followed. I am not a law expert myself and cannot comment on if there is any such law. But what I am basing is more on the everyday commensense behaviour that all we humans follow for any queue. FIFO is the predominant thing being done for any queue and that will be the most resonable way to process be it a bunch of applicantions waiting on a queue or to service a number of people waiting on a queue in a bank or post office or whereever it might be. That is the fair, unbiased and non-preferential way of doing things. Isn't it?
I want to make sure to convey the point that I first of all wanted to bring this issue to everyone's attention. May be my message was worded strongly, but doesn't mean that I am not flexible.
I thought suing DOL is one of the options. Of course if there are other viable alternatives that will be less demanding, less expensive and will take a more non-confronting approach but still could have an equal impact in terms of resolving the issue amicably then I am all for it. But then the obvious question is what are the other equally good options? Someone mentioned about a petition. So what is a petition and how do we do it? Also mentioned was writing letters to congressmen etc. So who do we contact and how? Please, please anyone having the information please share.
One more thing is that I am all for a dialog with IV core members and their guidance for this. Since I started this thread doesn't mean that I wanted to sideline IVs, but this is the only way I thought I could communicate to the IV platform about the agony of this issue and how people have been affected by this. So I am all for talking with IV core members on this. But please let me know how I could do that?
So please let us start acting now: The list of next possible steps (in no particular order) are:
- Decide if there are viable alternatives to a lawsuit that is more non-confronting and first try them if possible
- Get the support of IV core team for this
- If no other alternatives are available then consider filing a case. Consult an attorney for this
- Raise more awareness about this and get allt he support we can
- Raise some money towards this cause
So please please provide more inputs so that we could start making some real progress. Thanks!!
Hello Risker,
After going through all postings, it is wise to consider the following actions in order:
1. Contact the IV core team and tell our problem. Ask their input about what we can do and whom we need to contact. They may let us in correct direction.
2. In the meantime, Get the details of peoples whose case are still in backlog centre.
3. Finally, nothing works and no one help us, file a lawsuit. (As I dont know anything about the lawsuit here, many of them mentioned that the lawsuit should be done by the employer and there is more possibility of loosing.. We should not lose heart on that. In the suit, we need to ask them to make it current and keep the same filing fees until 30 Sep 07)
P.S. As one of the posting mentioned, we may also consider waiting till Sep 07 before filing lawsuit. Because DOL promised to clear all cases before 30 Sep 07. If they dont then our case become more stronger. Till then we need to contact concerned people (like IV, congressman etc) and collect all infromation.
2011 Free Living Butterfly
nixstor
03-20 06:41 PM
Mr. Gotcher posts this today.
Controversy over calculation of "fall across" visa numbers (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4610)
Long to short, Mr. Gotcher thinks the explanation of Apr. VB is an error.
I will just quote the last two paragraphs. If you are interested with this topic, you can follow the link to see detail.
************************************************
This is where the controversy arises. Do these provision require the Visa Office to let unused visa number from higher preference categories �fall down� into lower preference categories before being made available to single state quotas, or can they move unused numbers from a worldwide preference category over to single state quotas while there is still demand in the lower worldwide categories?
The Visa Office interpretation is that if there are unused numbers within a specific worldwide category, those numbers may be made available to single state quotas even if lower worldwide preference categories have visa cutoff dates because they are oversubscribed. I believe that this is an error.
The visa office's interpretation is correct and if you read 202 (a) (5) it clearly says that the country limits should be ignored for unused visa numbers.
Remember that these numbers are first categorized and then assigned to applicants on a per country basis. In other words, a visa number if it is EB2, should be assigned to EB2 (no matter what) before it goes to EB3. If it is EB1 visa number and for it to become a EB2 visa number, there should not be any need for that number in EB1 category.
One reasoning why this was difficult to see is because CIS has essentially wasted so many numbers that people are unable to tell where the movement is coming from.
I have gone through the sections of 202 (a) (5) and 203 (b) and the text of the law does not say that prefer country limits over categories. In 202 (a)
(5) it actually says assign visa numbers wasted in any category can be assigned with out per country limits. If you look at how they overflow from one category to another, those visa numbers belong to that category before they do NOT belong to a oversubscribed state or belong to ROW.
B T W Ron G is very selective in deciding who/what should (be) post(ed) on his forum. This is his third thought about how we ended up here.
Controversy over calculation of "fall across" visa numbers (http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4610)
Long to short, Mr. Gotcher thinks the explanation of Apr. VB is an error.
I will just quote the last two paragraphs. If you are interested with this topic, you can follow the link to see detail.
************************************************
This is where the controversy arises. Do these provision require the Visa Office to let unused visa number from higher preference categories �fall down� into lower preference categories before being made available to single state quotas, or can they move unused numbers from a worldwide preference category over to single state quotas while there is still demand in the lower worldwide categories?
The Visa Office interpretation is that if there are unused numbers within a specific worldwide category, those numbers may be made available to single state quotas even if lower worldwide preference categories have visa cutoff dates because they are oversubscribed. I believe that this is an error.
The visa office's interpretation is correct and if you read 202 (a) (5) it clearly says that the country limits should be ignored for unused visa numbers.
Remember that these numbers are first categorized and then assigned to applicants on a per country basis. In other words, a visa number if it is EB2, should be assigned to EB2 (no matter what) before it goes to EB3. If it is EB1 visa number and for it to become a EB2 visa number, there should not be any need for that number in EB1 category.
One reasoning why this was difficult to see is because CIS has essentially wasted so many numbers that people are unable to tell where the movement is coming from.
I have gone through the sections of 202 (a) (5) and 203 (b) and the text of the law does not say that prefer country limits over categories. In 202 (a)
(5) it actually says assign visa numbers wasted in any category can be assigned with out per country limits. If you look at how they overflow from one category to another, those visa numbers belong to that category before they do NOT belong to a oversubscribed state or belong to ROW.
B T W Ron G is very selective in deciding who/what should (be) post(ed) on his forum. This is his third thought about how we ended up here.
more...
Hermione
09-21 02:52 PM
Dude is absolutely right. There is a lot of support for the cause of the undocumented. Their situation is ever more desperate, and what many people do not understand, because of their numbers and huge contribution to the economy, they pretty much hold this country hostage, because it simply will not be able to survive without them any more. This is why lawmakers are less interested in the cause of legal immigrants.
But there is a flipside to this story for us. EB immigrants can position their suggestions as a solution for the whole immigration system, and not just for helpign with the situation right now, but going into the future. How? Very simple. Increase EB quotas, exempt spouses, and repeal admissibility bars - and you will have a lot more visas left over from EB1-2-3 that go lower skilled 'other workers'. If there is no admissibility bars, they would be able to apply for CP in their countries. Not only that would help current undocumented, it will give future lower skilled worker a chance to come legally. And the best thing - no amnesty to make the antis go bananas again! Just my $0.02.
But there is a flipside to this story for us. EB immigrants can position their suggestions as a solution for the whole immigration system, and not just for helpign with the situation right now, but going into the future. How? Very simple. Increase EB quotas, exempt spouses, and repeal admissibility bars - and you will have a lot more visas left over from EB1-2-3 that go lower skilled 'other workers'. If there is no admissibility bars, they would be able to apply for CP in their countries. Not only that would help current undocumented, it will give future lower skilled worker a chance to come legally. And the best thing - no amnesty to make the antis go bananas again! Just my $0.02.
micofrost
07-18 02:09 PM
Ok, firstly, if you are really honest about your feelings, no one is really happy for another unless what the other has done is useful to you. You can wax your eloquence with claims to contrary, but you know it is true. So stop this pretensions.
Ok, you want a constructive suggestion? Rat on everyone who is doing fake jobs, is a body-shopee, bought his GC etc. That should get rid of at least 20-30% (conservative numbers). How many will support it? I guess not many.
How about asking USCIS to make the priority date of the substituted applications to be the day 140 is filed? Any takers there? I guess not.
And then people have the gall to tell us to be happy for Eb2ers, and that we are jealous.
PS: I realize that substitution is no longer possible, I mean to ask USCIS to retroactively apply the priority dates for such cases.
U know what, actually we all eb2 guys are very sad about the eb3 plight. And if we do get a visa number, we will request uscis to dsitribute it to eb3 category. does this make u guys happy now ???
why dont u think abt those guys, who filed in eb3 earlier, knew that the trouble is brewing, and switched jobs to be able to file under eb2. why you guys dint do that so far. dont blame uscis. they were, the are and they will remain a mystery for ever. its not our birthright. if DOS thinks they need more research grads, they will keep eb1 current, if they need more exp guys, they will improve the b2 category. And if they need more frsh grads, they will come to eb3. And if some exp person is stuck in eb3, he himself is to be blamed. dont blame anyone else for your ignorance of GC rules then.
So fact is we all are under DOS/USCIS mercy. 2 years back it was eb3 turn, now it is eb2 turn. Unfortunately no is blaming why ebI is always current. if that reason you can digest, then you should have the gall to digest this one too.
Ok, you want a constructive suggestion? Rat on everyone who is doing fake jobs, is a body-shopee, bought his GC etc. That should get rid of at least 20-30% (conservative numbers). How many will support it? I guess not many.
How about asking USCIS to make the priority date of the substituted applications to be the day 140 is filed? Any takers there? I guess not.
And then people have the gall to tell us to be happy for Eb2ers, and that we are jealous.
PS: I realize that substitution is no longer possible, I mean to ask USCIS to retroactively apply the priority dates for such cases.
U know what, actually we all eb2 guys are very sad about the eb3 plight. And if we do get a visa number, we will request uscis to dsitribute it to eb3 category. does this make u guys happy now ???
why dont u think abt those guys, who filed in eb3 earlier, knew that the trouble is brewing, and switched jobs to be able to file under eb2. why you guys dint do that so far. dont blame uscis. they were, the are and they will remain a mystery for ever. its not our birthright. if DOS thinks they need more research grads, they will keep eb1 current, if they need more exp guys, they will improve the b2 category. And if they need more frsh grads, they will come to eb3. And if some exp person is stuck in eb3, he himself is to be blamed. dont blame anyone else for your ignorance of GC rules then.
So fact is we all are under DOS/USCIS mercy. 2 years back it was eb3 turn, now it is eb2 turn. Unfortunately no is blaming why ebI is always current. if that reason you can digest, then you should have the gall to digest this one too.
more...
debabratn
07-06 06:00 PM
Just called USCIS and told her that My application was mailed on Jun 28th and it got delivered on July 02. I also told her that my PD is May 2003 (hence i'm eligible to file in June)..
She told me that since i mailed it in June and this Notice goes into effect in July 02 my application WILL NOT be rejected... She asked me to wait for receipt notice :)
GOING CRAZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
I guess I am little late on this post but I thought I would share what I got from the USCIS Call Center.
My application reached on July 2nd. When I asked the representative about the fate of my application, first she said I should be fine. Then, I asked about the updated July VB and she put me on hold for 2-3 mins. She came back and told me that my application would be rejected and sent back in 15 days. When I told her that my application was received before DOS released the update and technically my application was received by USCIS when the bulletin was still current, she said that would depend on the descretion of that USCIS office.....funny but that's what she said. Again, she said that I could reapply in Oct and they will process the application then. But when I asked whether she was sure that VB will be current in Oct, she said USCIS doesn't know that.
So, the bottom line is.....there is no point in calling USCIS and asking them about the current fiasco as they themselves are unsure. You can still call them and you might hear something different but equally confusing.
She told me that since i mailed it in June and this Notice goes into effect in July 02 my application WILL NOT be rejected... She asked me to wait for receipt notice :)
GOING CRAZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY
I guess I am little late on this post but I thought I would share what I got from the USCIS Call Center.
My application reached on July 2nd. When I asked the representative about the fate of my application, first she said I should be fine. Then, I asked about the updated July VB and she put me on hold for 2-3 mins. She came back and told me that my application would be rejected and sent back in 15 days. When I told her that my application was received before DOS released the update and technically my application was received by USCIS when the bulletin was still current, she said that would depend on the descretion of that USCIS office.....funny but that's what she said. Again, she said that I could reapply in Oct and they will process the application then. But when I asked whether she was sure that VB will be current in Oct, she said USCIS doesn't know that.
So, the bottom line is.....there is no point in calling USCIS and asking them about the current fiasco as they themselves are unsure. You can still call them and you might hear something different but equally confusing.
2010 free images of utterflies.
little_willy
06-14 11:38 PM
Interesting points. I have a question. When changing employers, after 180-day portability period, do we need to use the EAD or can the new employer file a new H-1B petition on your behalf essentially keeping your non-immigrant status valid at the same time your I-485 applied through your previous employer is still pending. Thanks.
Vinn,
Here are just a few that I can think of rightaway.
1. Once shifted to EAD you loose opportunity to renew or apply for a new H1B if you have not completed six years though.
2. You have to apply for EAD renewal every year and much in advance. H1Bs are issues for 3 year periods.
3. Suppose there is a delay in getting the renewal, you are NOT allowed to work until the renewal comes through. Renewal duration depends on the work load.
4. Fee of EAD is being hiked to $340 per year.
5. Couple of my EAD starting date was the approval date even though the current EAD had not exipred effectively loosing couple of months validity each time.
6. Due to some issues if I-485 gets revoked the EAD/AP are invalidated the very next moment and you accumulate illegal stay and would not have time to get the process going.
On the other hand having a H1B you can apply for EAD any time or not even apply if you have sufficient validity on it. Suppose the I-485 gets rejected you can reapply for a new one or from an another employer and still work/live legally in the US.
EAD allows you to work any type/number of jobs that is the big PLUS though!
TIA
Vinn,
Here are just a few that I can think of rightaway.
1. Once shifted to EAD you loose opportunity to renew or apply for a new H1B if you have not completed six years though.
2. You have to apply for EAD renewal every year and much in advance. H1Bs are issues for 3 year periods.
3. Suppose there is a delay in getting the renewal, you are NOT allowed to work until the renewal comes through. Renewal duration depends on the work load.
4. Fee of EAD is being hiked to $340 per year.
5. Couple of my EAD starting date was the approval date even though the current EAD had not exipred effectively loosing couple of months validity each time.
6. Due to some issues if I-485 gets revoked the EAD/AP are invalidated the very next moment and you accumulate illegal stay and would not have time to get the process going.
On the other hand having a H1B you can apply for EAD any time or not even apply if you have sufficient validity on it. Suppose the I-485 gets rejected you can reapply for a new one or from an another employer and still work/live legally in the US.
EAD allows you to work any type/number of jobs that is the big PLUS though!
TIA
more...
ahasan
04-25 06:45 PM
Contribution $100 thru Paypal.
Receipt ID: 8CX96284LM935704N
Thanks!!!
Receipt ID: 8CX96284LM935704N
Thanks!!!
hair clip art free download.
nave_kum
07-22 03:24 AM
07/21/2007: RFE/NOID Flexible Time Frame Rule and Need for USCIS Discretion for Pe-July 17, 2007 EB-485 Filers
July VB Fiasco was a tragic event in the American immigration history and we are grateful that the USCIS rectified the problem on July 17, 2007 by reversing its decision to deny July 2007 EB-485 applications. We do not have specific statisics on EB-485 filers from July 2, 2007 until July 17, 2007. However, for the two reasons, among others, a large number of applicants sent in EB-485 applications during the period. Firstly, they more or less anticipated that either DOS or USCIS would rectify the problems because of the potential serious flaws in their decisions. Secondly, AILF was preparing class action lawsuits and they wanted to make it sure that they took advantage of being a member of the class without actually being named as plaintiffs. One time, people thought it was a smart move and right thing to do it, even though this reporter suggested to the people to wait until August VB was released.
Currently, these early filers are literally going through nightmares, hardships, and sleepless nights because of the two reasons. The first reason is that their cases have been on hold and no Receipt Notices have been issued. The second reason is that recently the USCIS revised its rule (1) allowing the adjudicating officers to exercise a discretion and issue a RFE with the response time of less than 12 weeks and (2) to exercise a discretion to either reject or deny a petition or an application without issuing RFE when the "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Combination of these facts is currently creating a turmoil to these filers for the two reasons. There are some filers who submitted I-140/I-485 application without a sufficient documentation in haste, for instance, medical report, or other flaws in the submitted evidence. These people are restless not knowing whether their application could be rejected or denied, indeed a truly deadly consequences. The circumstances force them to wonder whether they should refile the petition/application before August 17, 2007 not to take any chances. There are, however, two hurdles to such decision. One is the recent denial of I-140 petitions by the adjudicators if the petition was not accompanied by the "original" labor certification. The another reason is no fixed rule or policy on the filing of multiple I-485 applications. This creates a fear that their second filing may also be rejected or denied. They are thus trapped! The second victims are international travelers. If the application is either rejected or denied and they are present in the U.S., they will be able to refile it after correcting the flaws in their initial evidence before August 17, 2007. However, when they are not present in the U.S., they will be deprived of such opportunities, which may be considered "deadly." Some people are still present in the U.S. at this time, but because of business or personal emergency, they will have to travel outside of the country using their H-1B/H-4 or L-1/L-2 visa. If their cases are rejcted or denied during their absence, they will not be able to refile it timely before August 17, 2007. They are trapped again! Their act which was considered a right thing to do to one time turns out to be a nightmare. Who would have anticipated the nightmare?
We urge the USCIS to consider the following actions to relieve these applicants from the unnecesary hardship:
Under he RFE/NOID Flexible Timeframe rule, a decision to reject or deny without a RFE remains a "discretion" of the individual adjudicator in each case. This reporter proposes that considering the unusual circumstances involving the July VB fiasco and the USCIS unusual remedial action at the last minute, the USCIS exempts these filers from the rule and make it mandatory to issue RFE before rejection or denial unless the following flaws are found in the filing:
No filing fee checks or flaws in the filing fee checks
Missing signatures in the forms
Missing forms
Missing underlying certified labor certification application for I-140 petitions (either original or copy).
Should the filers decide to refile it before August 17, 2007, the USCIS should accept a copy of the certified labor certification application rather than rejection or denial of the refiled I-140 petition. In fact, it has been the INS/USCIS tradition to accept I-140 petition with a copy of the certified labor certification application inasmuch as the original was on file with the agency, albeit in other file of the same applicant or other applicants. Accordingly, it should be a matter of adhering to the tradition and to instruct the adjudicators not to reject such refiling on the issue of a copy of the certified labor certification application. Additionally, inasmuch as there is an evidence that the labor certification has been certified by the DOL but the applicant was unable to submit the original or copy because the application was lost or yet to be delivered to the applicant, such I-140 which was filed during the period should not be rejected or denied. Again, it has been a tradition of the agency to request a duplicate certified labor certification from the DOL by the agency itself when there was a proof of certification. We urge the USCIS to exercise the discretion and instruct the adjudicators not to reject or deny I-140 filed during the problem period for the reasons of missing "original."
Foregoing actions will relieve these filers from most of the nightmares or status of being trapped. It is thus strongly urged that the leaders of the USCIS extend a compassion on a human level and exercise a discretion immediately to take the foregoing actions. This reporter has been receiving hundres of emails from these filers and had to share the pains and emotional despair since there was no answer to the foregoing issues under the curcumstances. Since the deadline of filing is August 17, 2007, the USCIS should swiftly release an announcement to relieve these people from the problem "effectively." On behalf of all these trapped, this reporter personally pleas the leaders of the USCIS to act quickly.
July VB Fiasco was a tragic event in the American immigration history and we are grateful that the USCIS rectified the problem on July 17, 2007 by reversing its decision to deny July 2007 EB-485 applications. We do not have specific statisics on EB-485 filers from July 2, 2007 until July 17, 2007. However, for the two reasons, among others, a large number of applicants sent in EB-485 applications during the period. Firstly, they more or less anticipated that either DOS or USCIS would rectify the problems because of the potential serious flaws in their decisions. Secondly, AILF was preparing class action lawsuits and they wanted to make it sure that they took advantage of being a member of the class without actually being named as plaintiffs. One time, people thought it was a smart move and right thing to do it, even though this reporter suggested to the people to wait until August VB was released.
Currently, these early filers are literally going through nightmares, hardships, and sleepless nights because of the two reasons. The first reason is that their cases have been on hold and no Receipt Notices have been issued. The second reason is that recently the USCIS revised its rule (1) allowing the adjudicating officers to exercise a discretion and issue a RFE with the response time of less than 12 weeks and (2) to exercise a discretion to either reject or deny a petition or an application without issuing RFE when the "initial evidence" is missing in the filing. Combination of these facts is currently creating a turmoil to these filers for the two reasons. There are some filers who submitted I-140/I-485 application without a sufficient documentation in haste, for instance, medical report, or other flaws in the submitted evidence. These people are restless not knowing whether their application could be rejected or denied, indeed a truly deadly consequences. The circumstances force them to wonder whether they should refile the petition/application before August 17, 2007 not to take any chances. There are, however, two hurdles to such decision. One is the recent denial of I-140 petitions by the adjudicators if the petition was not accompanied by the "original" labor certification. The another reason is no fixed rule or policy on the filing of multiple I-485 applications. This creates a fear that their second filing may also be rejected or denied. They are thus trapped! The second victims are international travelers. If the application is either rejected or denied and they are present in the U.S., they will be able to refile it after correcting the flaws in their initial evidence before August 17, 2007. However, when they are not present in the U.S., they will be deprived of such opportunities, which may be considered "deadly." Some people are still present in the U.S. at this time, but because of business or personal emergency, they will have to travel outside of the country using their H-1B/H-4 or L-1/L-2 visa. If their cases are rejcted or denied during their absence, they will not be able to refile it timely before August 17, 2007. They are trapped again! Their act which was considered a right thing to do to one time turns out to be a nightmare. Who would have anticipated the nightmare?
We urge the USCIS to consider the following actions to relieve these applicants from the unnecesary hardship:
Under he RFE/NOID Flexible Timeframe rule, a decision to reject or deny without a RFE remains a "discretion" of the individual adjudicator in each case. This reporter proposes that considering the unusual circumstances involving the July VB fiasco and the USCIS unusual remedial action at the last minute, the USCIS exempts these filers from the rule and make it mandatory to issue RFE before rejection or denial unless the following flaws are found in the filing:
No filing fee checks or flaws in the filing fee checks
Missing signatures in the forms
Missing forms
Missing underlying certified labor certification application for I-140 petitions (either original or copy).
Should the filers decide to refile it before August 17, 2007, the USCIS should accept a copy of the certified labor certification application rather than rejection or denial of the refiled I-140 petition. In fact, it has been the INS/USCIS tradition to accept I-140 petition with a copy of the certified labor certification application inasmuch as the original was on file with the agency, albeit in other file of the same applicant or other applicants. Accordingly, it should be a matter of adhering to the tradition and to instruct the adjudicators not to reject such refiling on the issue of a copy of the certified labor certification application. Additionally, inasmuch as there is an evidence that the labor certification has been certified by the DOL but the applicant was unable to submit the original or copy because the application was lost or yet to be delivered to the applicant, such I-140 which was filed during the period should not be rejected or denied. Again, it has been a tradition of the agency to request a duplicate certified labor certification from the DOL by the agency itself when there was a proof of certification. We urge the USCIS to exercise the discretion and instruct the adjudicators not to reject or deny I-140 filed during the problem period for the reasons of missing "original."
Foregoing actions will relieve these filers from most of the nightmares or status of being trapped. It is thus strongly urged that the leaders of the USCIS extend a compassion on a human level and exercise a discretion immediately to take the foregoing actions. This reporter has been receiving hundres of emails from these filers and had to share the pains and emotional despair since there was no answer to the foregoing issues under the curcumstances. Since the deadline of filing is August 17, 2007, the USCIS should swiftly release an announcement to relieve these people from the problem "effectively." On behalf of all these trapped, this reporter personally pleas the leaders of the USCIS to act quickly.
more...
amitjoey
05-25 03:52 PM
Thank you everybody that has contributed. We need to raise $50,000 in the next 15 days. That is $3334 raised every day. Now even though this looks like a big amount to raise, with a collective effort we can do this.
Goal by end of today: $23,338
Amount Reached: $6,300
Goal by end of today: $23,338
Amount Reached: $6,300
hot Butterflies are Free by Elaine
singhsa3
07-17 09:58 PM
Some of the core members are also stuck in BEC. But they still worked selfleshly. And don't preach injustice to me, I came here to study in 1999, got one labor (PD 2002) rejected on technical grounds, went in for other labor PD 2005, so my situation is probably worse than you.
Most people showing their cool wisdom still not getting the point. A BEC person with Feb 2005 PD may not be able to file for another 2 years while a PD 2007 person will be enjoying EAD during that time. In my dictionary this is injustice. And that's why i was kinda happy when they updated the July bulletin, now I'm not really happy even if my company has already filed my 485/EAD on july 2. I'm still wishing (and i'll be honest) USCIS come up with a reason/regulation/rule that will delay EAD for everyone until BEC people are able to file 485 OR in Oct they retrogress only till March 2005.
P.S. if you are superstitious, you want to know this: most of my relatives/freinds call me "Black Tongue" because usually when i say something unpleasent it happens. e.g. i told my wife last month that i don't believe everyone is able to file 485, something will go wrong and everyone will be disappointed. (when everyone expects something it does not happen- contrarian theory)
Most people showing their cool wisdom still not getting the point. A BEC person with Feb 2005 PD may not be able to file for another 2 years while a PD 2007 person will be enjoying EAD during that time. In my dictionary this is injustice. And that's why i was kinda happy when they updated the July bulletin, now I'm not really happy even if my company has already filed my 485/EAD on july 2. I'm still wishing (and i'll be honest) USCIS come up with a reason/regulation/rule that will delay EAD for everyone until BEC people are able to file 485 OR in Oct they retrogress only till March 2005.
P.S. if you are superstitious, you want to know this: most of my relatives/freinds call me "Black Tongue" because usually when i say something unpleasent it happens. e.g. i told my wife last month that i don't believe everyone is able to file 485, something will go wrong and everyone will be disappointed. (when everyone expects something it does not happen- contrarian theory)
more...
house Free Butterflies Screensaver
humdesi
03-20 10:15 PM
I don't understand the confusion. Didn't Ron mention in an earlier post that the DoS guy who makes cutoff decisions said that all new EB-2 India visas will only come from EB-1 unused numbers?
Doesn't matter what Ron thinks - what matters is what DoS is planning to do.
Doesn't matter what Ron thinks - what matters is what DoS is planning to do.
tattoo free just utterflies
Jaime
09-05 09:47 AM
Hey guys, let's each try to change at least 10 minds between now and the rally! That would bring us great success!
more...
pictures Free Butterfly Screensaver
sheela
06-25 04:31 PM
They hushed up and approved my EAD in 20 days. Why ???? 'cos So they don't hit Jun'30 and give 2 years. They wanted to milk another 680 from me so they hushed up and sent me the 1 year EAD in 20 days.
What is the effective date of new EAD?. Does it start from the expiration date of old/current EAD or from the date of approval of new EAD ?
What is the effective date of new EAD?. Does it start from the expiration date of old/current EAD or from the date of approval of new EAD ?
dresses free images of utterflies.
posmd
07-01 08:36 AM
Very good news indeed.
In the US politics for some reason, certain issues seem to get clubbed together.
Sometimes it suits our purposes and at other times it is vexing. Clearly our issue of legal immigration does not create the type of backlash from conservative republicans that the issue of illegal immigration does. Hence when our circumstances necessitate that we have to try to board the CIR train to our goals I consider it unfortunate.
On the other hand when it comes to H1b immigration, every H1b increase has corresponded with some sort of provision(mainly recapture) of EB visas also. H1b increase has tremendous support and pressure from the powerful capitalist forces in this country. Just see how the Wall street Journal and Pres.Bush gives publicity to this issue. I doubt pure EB provisions can get that sort of visibility in spite of the tremendous work of organisations like IV.
In that sense the H1b cap being exhausted indirectly gives our issue more visibility and is a good development. Lets wait until the 20K US masters cap is also filled, then publicity will increase even more.
All in all it looks good that something will work for us by the end of this year. The pressure is building on congress to do something about EB immigration.
In the US politics for some reason, certain issues seem to get clubbed together.
Sometimes it suits our purposes and at other times it is vexing. Clearly our issue of legal immigration does not create the type of backlash from conservative republicans that the issue of illegal immigration does. Hence when our circumstances necessitate that we have to try to board the CIR train to our goals I consider it unfortunate.
On the other hand when it comes to H1b immigration, every H1b increase has corresponded with some sort of provision(mainly recapture) of EB visas also. H1b increase has tremendous support and pressure from the powerful capitalist forces in this country. Just see how the Wall street Journal and Pres.Bush gives publicity to this issue. I doubt pure EB provisions can get that sort of visibility in spite of the tremendous work of organisations like IV.
In that sense the H1b cap being exhausted indirectly gives our issue more visibility and is a good development. Lets wait until the 20K US masters cap is also filled, then publicity will increase even more.
All in all it looks good that something will work for us by the end of this year. The pressure is building on congress to do something about EB immigration.
more...
makeup License: Freeware Free
rb_248
02-08 03:56 PM
I am in a lot of stress. Please help out if possible.
Six years on my H1B expire in April 2008. I just got laid off from company A. My last day of work will be May 31st. I have LC and I-140 approved with company A.
If I join company B starting June, and transfer my H1B to B, can it extend my H1B beyond 6 years based on the approved I-140 I had with company A? If yes, will it be for one year or three years?
Gurus please help. I will be grateful.
Thanks
Dont worry. You are not the first person to face this situation. You will come out of this without any major setbacks.
Find another job.
Transfer H1-b (dont have to apply for a new one)
Request your current employer not to revoke your I-140.
With the new company apply for LC and then I-140.
Thats all you have to do.
IV folks are with you. What kind of job are you looking for? May be someone at IV could help you.
Six years on my H1B expire in April 2008. I just got laid off from company A. My last day of work will be May 31st. I have LC and I-140 approved with company A.
If I join company B starting June, and transfer my H1B to B, can it extend my H1B beyond 6 years based on the approved I-140 I had with company A? If yes, will it be for one year or three years?
Gurus please help. I will be grateful.
Thanks
Dont worry. You are not the first person to face this situation. You will come out of this without any major setbacks.
Find another job.
Transfer H1-b (dont have to apply for a new one)
Request your current employer not to revoke your I-140.
With the new company apply for LC and then I-140.
Thats all you have to do.
IV folks are with you. What kind of job are you looking for? May be someone at IV could help you.
girlfriend Animated Butterfly Pond
northstar
09-29 05:48 PM
I had recent experience with continental the flight got cancelled but the staff was good they immediately gave me tickets to Virgin Atlantic (which was earliest departure) but I had Advanced Parole and so could not take VA.
rockstart, what was the issue with Advance Parole, can you elaborate?
rockstart, what was the issue with Advance Parole, can you elaborate?
hairstyles The utterflies are free.
franklin
09-25 03:23 PM
Most countries do not have 9,800 EB applicants every year - in fact, most countries use well under 1,000.
The total number of applicants from other countries can be derived from roughly estimating number if H1 holders, adjusting for Indians and Chinese, and then dividing by 2 (50% of H1Bs never end up getting a green card), and then multiplying by 2 to adjust for derivatives. The bottom line - there are visas available in EB2 ROW and EB1 categories (which are current, meaning, undersubscribed), that are getting redistributed to EB3 ROW. This is why EB3 in total is using more than its share of 140,000 EBs. In fact, I believe the dates will be moving pretty fast on EB3 ROW, it will probably get all current in a couple of years.
Yes, I understand that most countries use nowhere near 9800 per year - its was a hypothetical answer in response to the OPs question.
I still think your estimation that EB3 ROW becoming current in 2 years is on the optimistic side - especially with no change in legislation.
The total number of applicants from other countries can be derived from roughly estimating number if H1 holders, adjusting for Indians and Chinese, and then dividing by 2 (50% of H1Bs never end up getting a green card), and then multiplying by 2 to adjust for derivatives. The bottom line - there are visas available in EB2 ROW and EB1 categories (which are current, meaning, undersubscribed), that are getting redistributed to EB3 ROW. This is why EB3 in total is using more than its share of 140,000 EBs. In fact, I believe the dates will be moving pretty fast on EB3 ROW, it will probably get all current in a couple of years.
Yes, I understand that most countries use nowhere near 9800 per year - its was a hypothetical answer in response to the OPs question.
I still think your estimation that EB3 ROW becoming current in 2 years is on the optimistic side - especially with no change in legislation.
walking_dude
10-04 06:17 PM
Wake up and roar, "Tigers" and "Lions" of Detroit. Unfurl your "Red Wings" and pump up yours "Pistons".
... actually join us for a meet, greet and eat :D
... actually join us for a meet, greet and eat :D
sounakc
03-05 07:20 AM
I also got the same letter. Do I have to cough up 5000$ or I only have to pay if I want to start the process.
No comments:
Post a Comment